Visiting the enemy: They're wrong, but fun to argue with

Star Newspapers (Chicago) ^ | Sunday, October 12, 2003 | Michael J. Bowers

[Chi-townChief]

One year ago this month, Peter N. Kirstein, a professor at Saint Xavier University on the South Side, stirred a tempest with his e-mail reply to an Air Force cadet who wanted to organize a political forum on campus.

The gory details are readily available on the Internet, so I won't rehash them here. Suffice it to say it's not a very good idea anymore to say the Air Force is cowardly and kills babies.

The professor and the cadet smoothed things over, and the incident has receded into the past.

One phenomenon that has not receded into the past, however, is that university professors are oppressively liberal. Education is one of just two institutions in America that are more liberal than the press (the other is Hollywood).

Consider these figures:

David Horowitz, the red-diaper baby and '60s radical who moved to the right after the Black Panthers murdered a woman friend of his, recently went on a tour of universities. Among other things, he found that at Michigan, students could not identify even one conservative professor.

In April, after we won the war and Iraqis were celebrating in the streets, the Academic Senate at UCLA voted to condemn the war by a vote of 180-7. How's that for campus diversity?

According to American Enterprise magazine, 166 professors at Cornell University are registered with liberal parties, but just six with conservative parties.

At Brown the ratio is 54-3; at Stanford, 151-17; at Texas, 94-15. At the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, which frequently produces Cabinet members, the ratio is 145-5.

Then there's anecdotal evidence. In March, a professor at Columbia named Nicholas De Genova expressed his wish that American be visited by "a million Mogadishus" — Mogadishu being the city in Somalia where 18 U.S. soldiers were killed in 1993.

I could go on, but I have only so much space.

Now, however, there's a bit of a surprise for the lefty professors. Their students are less malleable and more conservative. They resent their professors' strident attacks on America.

It's not hard to figure out why. Aging professors grew up in the Vietnam era; today's students grew up in the Reagan era. Plus, a lot of deluded liberals came to their senses on 9-11.

In sum, trashing America just isn't as sexy as it used to be.

According to a report in the Tampa Tribune, some students even think professor protests are inappropriate, and the teachers need to learn their place.

A sophomore at Amherst said: "There comes a point when you wonder: Are you fostering a discussion, or are you promoting an opinion you want students to embrace, or even parrot?"

Given the above, I thought it would be interesting to get the views of professor Kirstein, an avowed pacifist.

In somewhat of a surprise, he readily agreed to talk to me, even though he has read a few of my columns and has no illusions about where I stand in the political spectrum.

And in another surprise (or was it my disappointment?), he made a convincing case that he's committed to unrestrained political debate. He was adamant that professors have a right to express their opinions in class (I didn't know anyone said they didn't). But he was equally adamant that once the professor stops talking, the students have every right to tell the professor he's nuts.

In other words, it seems to me, he believes the clash of opinions kills fallacious arguments and strengthens valid ones — sort of Darwinism visits the marketplace of ideas.

I saw some of myself in him: He likes to get it on with his opponents, poke and prod, discover and exploit their weaknesses.

"I love to debate the Right Wing," he explains. "That's where all the excitement is. They produce the ideas, the agenda, the tone of political discourse in America. They're much more interesting than the Left. They're fun, smart and on their toes, and many of them are the primary defenders of free speech and academic freedom in the United States.''

The Left, on the other hand, is bogged down, he says. They're still obsessed with Ronald Reagan, trying desperately to figure out how such a dunce could have been so popular with the American people.

I came away from the discussion thinking it would have been fun to have Kirstein as a professor. We could have had the most satisfying verbal brawls.

Because, you see, to me, political debate is rather like a sport. You want to unnerve your opponents with trash talk, you want to embarrass them, you want to defeat them.

But you certainly don't want to destroy them. Because then who would you have as company for a few beers and a football game?

Oops, scratch football. Professor Kirstein doesn't approve. He thinks colleges would be better off dumping the sport, because it's dangerous and destructive. We don't need football, he says. "We need peace."

Sheesh, what an egghead, I thought. But I can't hold it against him too much. If you're gonna be a lefty professor, you have to subscribe to the appropriate lefty professor positions.

My conclusion: There is no question that the ranks of university professors are dominated by fervent liberals. Nevertheless, some professors, such as Mr. Kirstein, are devoted to the expression of opposite views. If all professors shared his philosophy, American universities would not be such a dangerous place.

But I am not convinced they do. Why not? Because after 22 years in the news business, I believe that many reporters are not devoted to the expression of opposite views. They come to think their left-wing opinion is the only one that's moderate and reasonable. Anyone who disagrees is automatically an extremist.

Can professors do better than reporters? Maybe. But I'll withhold judgment until I see more evidence. I'm not holding my breath.

Michael Bowers is a copy editor at The Star. He may be reached at (708) 633-6744 or via e-mail at mbowers@starnewspapers.com.

[Chi-townChief]

"I love to debate the Right Wing," he explains. "That's where all the excitement is. They produce the ideas, the agenda, the tone of political discourse in America. They're much more interesting than the Left. They're fun, smart and on their toes, and many of them are the primary defenders of free speech and academic freedom in the United States.''

I have to say that I'm surprised as hell that this is coming from Kirstein. Most of the liberals I know usually say, "I don't want to discuss it anymore" when they realize they can't switch you over.

[Chi-townChief]

CHICAGOLAND PING

[Support Free Republic]

---

God Bless America! God Bless This Man!
	Keep Our Republic Free Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD AND SAY THANKS TO JIM ROBINSON! It is in the breaking news sidebar!

[Humidston]

Anyone who disagrees is automatically an extremist. a zealot, a hater, "mean," racist, homophobe, war monger, fascist, bigot.

[bjcintennessee]

Most of the liberals I know usually say, "I don't want to discuss it anymore" when they realize they can't switch you over.

Aaargh!! You are speaking of my own daughter here! I raised her better than that. She has a masters degree in environmental science (I honestly thought she chose that field because she always loved our camping trips and loved the outdoors). I had no idea at the time she was attending college that it was a thorough indoctrination of liberal views.

Ah well, we simply avoid most political discussions these days.

[rwr8084]

How true about campus liberalism.... Don't forget what happened to the College Republicans at Southern Methodist University earlier this month who conducted a bake sale with race-based prices. I experienced this leftist bias firsthand when I was in college as the professor of my 18th Century history class devoted many classes to bashing then-President George H. W. Bush and former U. S. Senator Jesse Helms.

[PeterPrinciple]

"... Their students are less malleable and more conservative. They resent their professors' strident attacks on America...."


One of the truths of human nature is we are always managing the past. I need to rethink what students are like on campus. I see bits of this happening but my thoughts always go back 20 or 30 years.

[Not A Snowbird]

LOL! I hear "I don't want to discuss it anymore" from my teenage daughter on just about any subject you care to name, especially if we parents are holding our ground and not caving in to her arguments. Yikes, does that mean she's a (gulp) liberal-in-training?!

[q_an_a]

Right, you can debate the prof and get a failing grade or a grade that keeps you out of grad school. Who's fantasy is he living in?

[pepperdog]

I have the same thoughts. I find it hard to believe that a professor who is so dedicated to his political agenda as to make it a topic of class discussion would not be prejudiced against conservative students and carry that prejudice into the grades he gave that student.

[lawdude]

Arizona State will NOT allow Horowitz on campus because he is a 'radical'. The local COX cable would NOT put FNS on cable for years because they were "radical'.

I dumped COX and when my Alma Mater (BS-Physics 1967 and JD-1992) asks for $$, they get the envelope back with appropriate comments.

In the law school, I doubt there were 2 conservative profs. And this is a conservative state.....well kind of!

Bless Barry Goldwater.

[Chi-townChief]

I had that happen in an English class, of all things, in the early 70s. The assignment was to write a dissertation about how the "Joe College" of today (early 70s) differs from his counterpart of ten years ago (late 50s / early 60s.) My paper was entitled "The New Conformity" and I, pretty much point-by-point, compared attitude, fashion, politics, etc. of the two eras. Of course, the professor scalded me for it since, as I should have known, it was supposed to be about the letter sweater, buttoned-down, conformist Eisenhower era vs. the do-your-own-thing now. I escaped the semester with a C anyway.

[shhrubbery!]

I came away from the discussion thinking it would have been fun to have Kirstein as a professor. We could have had the most satisfying verbal brawls.

True, it may be "fun," but lively classroom discussions are not what a college education, generally, should be about.

You can have plenty of gab-fests in dorms, at informal "sherry hours" with professors, or off-campus for that matter.

But the classroom is supposed to be place where professors transmit learning, not conduct bull sessions.

Sandra Day O'Connor bought into this stupidity in her recent Michigan law school opinion. I.e., minority students should be be admitted ipso facto because "diversity" makes for "more lively classroom discussions."

"Lively classroom discussions" may make the class more fun and less work (for both students and instructors); but they are rarely truly instructive.

[moodyskeptic]

I suspect professor Kirstein is simply lying. The writer took him at his word that he gives conservative students all the time they need to debate. Nobody volunteers that they are a classroom tyrant with a closed mind, regardless the truth. People tend to polish their own trophys.

Try asking a cop if he sometimes mistreats a suspect in custody. You will get the answer you deserve.

If you actually believe this Kirstein conducts class the way he insists, you are gullible or have forgotton what college was really like. You don't get to debate your boss, or your college teachers, head on.

The left has forfeitted away it's debating skills with 40 years of controlling the dialog. In four years of college in the seventies I never experienced ONE even-handed political debate. The liberal orthodoxy was so entrenched that there was no room for rebuttal. Left good, Right bad. Environment good, Business bad. Minority good, European white bad.

The narcissistic Babyboomers had sucked all the air out of the classroom until dialog was impossible. We were expected to kneel before their chosen gods: Marx, Malcolm X, JFK, Woodstock, Angela Davis, FDR, Che, Fidel, MLK Jr., diversity and tolerance.

And that was in the seventies, I know from engaging my nephews that American universities have gotten only more liberal over the last 30 years. I wish Horowitz luck, but the job is bigger than this writer imagines.

[The UnVeiled Lady]

Aaargh!! You are speaking of my own daughter here! I raised her better than that. She has a masters degree in environmental science (I honestly thought she chose that field because she always loved our camping trips and loved the outdoors). I had no idea at the time she was attending college that it was a thorough indoctrination of liberal views.

If she has good grades you can make the point that she should share her good grades with the unfortunate others who haven't done so well. Hopefully a friend who parties, not studies. If she has a 4.0 and the friend a 2.0 then if she would give 1.0 to her friend they would be the same. It is only fair and socialism. See if she would agree to do that.

HHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAA HHHHHAAAAAAAAA

[Chi-townChief]

Hell, I get that from my brother-in-law and his girlfriend who are both around 40. They came over for Thanksgiving last year and announced to everyone that it sickened them to see the American flag on our house. When challenged to explain why, it was "Never mind."

[fire_eye]

I suspect professor Kirstein is simply lying.

I don't think so - not entirely, at least. I think he got his head yanked forcibly out of the sand (or elsewhere where he had "misplaced" it) and has actually realized that the so-called "right-wingers" he encounters are better informed and arguably more intelligent than the leftist sheep in his "flock".

Try asking a cop if he sometimes mistreats a suspect in custody.

Well, that depends on how well I know the cop...

You don't get to debate your boss, or your college teachers, head on.

Well, yes and no... You can't challenge them in class, because that represents a threat to their "authority" (except in cases - if any such exist - where the prof. or manager has enough self-confidence and humility not to be afraid of being challenged). But, you can go after them in your written assignments - particularly if you do it obliquely, by submitting and supporting arguments contrary to their positions - and then you can force them to defend any criticism they make thereof... In some ways, they hate *that* even worse than a direct verbal challenge, because of the way academics and intellectuals confer an increased onus of credibility and respectability upon the written word.

I wish Horowitz luck, but the job is bigger than this writer imagines.

Horowitz is a bigger problem for the Left than *they* even *can* imagine. He's capable of researching and documenting the cancer of leftism in America to an extent greater than anyone else of my acquaintance, at least. He's a definite case of "Fear This"...

[RJL]

They came over for Thanksgiving last year and announced to everyone that it sickened them to see the American flag on our house.

Not only are they hard leftists, I see they're so polite too.

[JoJo Gunn]

He's disingenuous, a backpedaler, because he soundly got his butt kicked last year over attacking the Military that protects his precious "values" he shoplifted from a dumpster.

[moodyskeptic]

I accept your rebuttals. Good man.

I still think that Kirstein, if the article is accurate, is a very rare bird. In my experience when someone prefaces a dialog with " I love to engage the opposition because", it means the opposite is actually true. It's a hedge meant to prepare you for emotional rhetoric.